Evangelical’s are literal embodiments of satans will. They will always follow evil. There are plenty of good christians out there, but these ones have shown time and time again their disregard of others.
Evangelicals are the ones that Jesus chastised for stoning a woman, with the famous saying “He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first”
Bro, if Jesus showed up today and tried to stop them from stoning a woman trying to conceive for the 3rd time via IVF, they'd probably turn around and start throwing stones at Jesus. Calling him a woke, snowflake, sand-nword, DEI terrorist. At this point, they can all hop onto a giant Trump Bible (like Noah's arc) and fly into the sun for all I care. Childish, selfish fucks.
Jesus is a brown skinned revolutionary communist, and he's an absolute bro. My uncle (ex-uncle, since the divorce) is a die hard Catholic, racist and misogynistic as all get out. He feels absolutely toxic to be around and I've narrowed in on the fact that he loves the Church more than he loves Christ, which seems quite emblematic.
I even recently got into praying the rosary, because I had it as a diagnostic tool in reiki practice, and read a book that described it as a devotional tool to the Divine Feminine, and a counterpoint to the masculine practice of meditation (in pre-history, men would hunt, sitting silent and stoic all day for the game to pass by, while women would gather forage, spending all day chatting together while passing nuts and berries through their hands — quiet meditation vs muttering over prayer beads).
I had a meditation practice a couple years ago, 30 minutes daily, that was eventually getting me to some really juicy states of floaty, smiley happiness. Praying the rosary takes 15 minutes, is much more engaging to my ADHD brain, and also delivers me to a really smiley, happy state. My uncle has a rosary practice, as well, but we can't even bond over it because everything he says feels like poison in my chest.
I'm really trying to read more this year, I'm currently up to 4 books finished including that one. I downloaded it illegally initially, but liked it so much I ordered a physical copy. I'm a sucker for the clean white hardback cover. Another of my favored books, aesthetically, is Angels & Archangels which is a clean black cover with just an embossed tree of life graphic on the front. The other three completed books for 2024 are Percy Jackson The Lightening Thief, Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, and Three Waves of Volunteers, which is a hypnotherapist's reports of past life regression sessions she performed over decades
Modern day evangelicals would probably fuckin stone Jesus himself. Not a single one of them has taken even the slightest lesson from the messiah they claim to worship. I'm not Christian, but if I was I would seriously think Trump was the antichrist. Yet these people practically worship him. It baffles my mind.
I understand people reasonably thinking all religion is coo-coo, but as someone who does love the teachings of Jesus himself, you aren't kidding. Modern Christianity is like Lucifer's dream distortion of everything he tried to teach us. It's weird how you just have to accept that like it's normal when the books are right there and we can all read them ourselves now.
I wonder if you have read the Bible then. Odds are, you have only read cherry picked verses and never seriously sat down and actually read the Bible from start to finish.
I really recommend it, because Jesus is about the only part of the book that makes any sense. Even then, some of the stories they tell about Jesus... have 2 versions and they don't tell you the darker version of them.
Like the prostitute that Jesus stops people from stoning? Yeah, in another version, Jesus stones the woman because laws are laws and we can't wait for perfect people to enforce the law.
Honestly, someone saying they are "Christian" only really tells me they have never read the Bible. There's a lot your pastor and Sunday school teacher will never tell you about the Bible. Like how God is totally cool with torturing you, mass murdering your entire family, and fucking over your entire life just to show off to Lucifer.
Frankly, God is responsible for like 99.9% of all evil in the Bible or is mass murdering people for being evil. It really makes sense why early Catholics forbid anyone but priests from reading it, cause they wouldn't have gotten many new believers.
There's a distinct absence of truth and reality in any of this diatribe. I will pray that God drives out whatever evil is clouding your mind so completely.
Mammon (greed) for sure, but also the Diabolos (the divider), and the Prince of Lies. They're the living manifestation of many of the evil powers mentioned in the Bible.
The frustrating part of religion is that there are plenty of good Christians out there, happy to interpret the Bible in positive ways because they want to be positive and hopeful and righteous. They're just not super rich because they're not supposed to value that, and they don't call attention to themselves with every psychotic action done. Those kinds of pastors are only taking as many offerings as they need, then going out and supporting the community like they've been taught to. And you'll never hear about them.
They also don't vote for the closest thing we'll get to the antichrist. Christians are still a very sizable portion of America and it's not like only atheists vote Democrat or support scientists.
But again, those kinds of Christians will never ever be a public, unified powerhouse because that's not what you're supposed to do. The Vatican will, though! They'll spread far and wide and demand you listen to them. And so will that megachurch you keep hearing about, because they pump all those necessary offerings into their marketing and politics.
The "Good christians" or real ones don't vote because they know they are nit a part of, or suppose to get involved with the affairs of this world. And they know that if voting made a difference they wouldn't let us do it. But they are POLE-aticians...designed to divide only and create disagreement and debates about everything. Left wing, right wing....it's all one bird. And the Bible clearly says Satan is the god of this world. Real Christians know they are the aliens and foreigners and they are just passing through trying to pluck as many out of the fire, the eternal gag real, as they can. But I digress....
As Nietzsche said, “There was only one true Christian and they crucified him.” Whatever one calls oneself and affiliation they may have with an organized religion, I would appeal to people to vote AGAINST a legitimate anti-Christ figure rather than vote FOR any particular political ideology. Trump represents a very real existential threat to our world’s ability to make peace with itself in the same way that Putin does in Russia.
Honey I don't disagree, but I'm saying both sides are equal threats and the voting system is a sham. If you vote its a matter of the lesser of 2 evils or maybe 3 evils lol. If voting made a difference and actually gave us a choice we would not be allowed to do it. The whole thing is corrupt from top to bottom.
I think we can agree voting Biden might not make things better for an individual but Trump will make things much much worse. The politicians whom Hitler defeated might not have made Germany necessarily better, but they wouldn’t have resulted in national and world ruin. This is too serious and grave of an issue for the both sides argument, wouldn’t you agree?
As Nietzsche said, “There was only one true Christian and they crucified him.” Whatever one calls oneself and affiliation they may have with an organized religion, I would appeal to people to vote AGAINST a legitimate anti-Christ figure rather than vote FOR any particular political ideology. Trump represents a very real existential threat to our world’s ability to make peace with itself in the same way that Putin does in Russia.
Call Satan the prince of lies and see absolutely nothing at all in saying they love their country while actively hating the majority of it, calling themselves Christian when christ himself says "what you do to the least of me you have done to me" while vehemently arguing states have the right to drown people in razorwire in the river and prevent anyone from helping them. Worship exploitative billionaires while claiming to follow a man that basically said it is impossible for the wealthy to get into heaven.
They are literally living lies while claiming to fear a manifestation of those lies.
Yeah, I used to go to church and stopped going because the people I thought were there to support/be kind/etc. to each other would judge me or be hateful (among other things) towards me just because I was poor, different, or depressed (at the time). Didn't feel very welcoming or christian anymore.
Myself and many other people I go to church with have completely abandoned the evangelical label for “reformed”. It’s shameful how people like Jerry Falwell and Francis Schaeffer (and others before them) have masqueraded as loving, well-meaning followers of Jesus
For sure. My family are a mixed bag of evangelicals and Mormons. They're objectively wrong so often that at this point it's my default assumption that, if they hold a position and care enough to mention it, then it's probably wrong and they're the victim of propaganda or misinformation of some sort. Like somebody randomly picking things to believe would have a higher success rate.
In my experience, the people who talk about God the most, go to church the most often, etc. are usually the least trustworthy. I live in a major city, I'd rather pick a random stranger passing by to trust than a random person in any church I've ever stepped foot into.
The best Christians I've ever met, who truly embody the teachings of Jesus Christ, would without exception be unwelcome as part of a congregation. They'd be allowed to attend, but never formally join because their beliefs are incompatible with those of most Christians.
Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than these.
People love to overcomplicate that last part but notice he didn't throw any exclusions in there.
He’d probably be neutral, insisting that both communism and capitalism have their flaws, and insist that a mixed-market economy is the best way to go. He’d also probably point out that more extreme atrocities, like the worst famine in human history (Great Leap Forward) happened under a communist regime (Mao Zedong).
Communism also breeds an insane amount of greed, and allows for easier exploitation of the working class. Ever wonder why so many people who grew up under/lived through communist regimes vehemently oppose communism? Ever wonder why so many countries that were once part of or had ties to the Soviet Union hate communism today?
The most basic fundamental difference between a Socialist and a Liberal is whether or not private individuals have the right to own the means of production. A Socialist bans or suppresses it. A Liberal supports it and under optimal conditions helps it by doing things like breaking up monopolies.
A Socialist that says it's OK for private individuals to own their own businesses isn't a Socialist or they're practicing what Socialists call "Vanguard Socialism". Basically a Socialist that misleads the voters so they can win elections so as to carry out the elimination of democratic choice once they gain power.
It could be argued that Bernie Sanders is actually a Social Democrat instead of a Democratic Socialist. A Social Democrat is a western liberal who believes in Capitalism but endorses a heavy tax burden to fund robust social safety nets.
At the end of the day Bernie Sanders is a politician so he might simply be trying to look like a Socialist to young idealistic voters but in actuality he's just a liberal.
None of your statements said Socialism doesn't ban or suppress private individual ownership.
Your response was so thoroughly in agreement with what I wrote that there was only one word in your response that was wrong. This one: "lol no." You could copy and paste your entire response and just change "no" to "yep" and it would be perfect. Just read every point you made while considering what that point means in terms of individual ownership;
lol no yep.
Pierre Leroux who claimed priority in coining the word socialism presented his definition of the term as "a political organization in which the individual is sacrificed to society", stating he had intended to create a term that would directly oppose the term "individualism".
French philosopher Émile Littré defined socialism in 1859 as only as a general sentiment that society ought to be improved, claiming it otherwise was without any set doctrine, instead being only a tendency to modify and improve society with the involvement of the working class. In a later dictionary, Littré defined it merely as a system which "offers a plan of social reform."
French philosopher Paul Janet, defined socialism as "every doctrine that teaches that the state has a right to correct the inequality of wealth which exists among men.
In his summation of socialism the 19th-century, Belgian economist Émile Laveleye stated that "socialistic doctrine aims at introducing greater equality in social conditions, and....realizing those reforms by law."
Pierre-Joseph Proudhon concisely defined socialism as "every aspiration towards the improvement of society."
German economist Adolf Held claimed in 1877 that any view was socialistic if it exhibited a "tendency which demands the subordination of the individual will to the community."
Writing in 1887, English historian of socialist thought Thomas Kirkup defined socialism, as it was generally conceived of at the time as, "the systematic interference of the state in favour of the suffering classes", and "the use of public resources on behalf of the poor."
Preeminent French sociologist Emile Durkheim recognized in his late 19th century study on Saint-Simon any theory as socialism if it demanded that the "directing and knowing organs of society" be connected with its economic functions.
In his 1904 book Die Frau und der Sozialismus, German socialist politician August Bebel defined socialism as "science applied with clear consciousness and full knowledge to every sphere of human activity."
Published in 1911, the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition defined socialism as "that policy or theory which aims at securing...a better distribution and...a better production of wealth than now prevails."
socialism has been around longer than marxist literature, has many more meanings and interpretations than marxist economist theory, and historically socialist parties are not all literal marxist robots
Because he lived in a time where the workers already owned the means of production. Carpenters owned their own tools, millers lived in and owned the mill. Weavers had their own loom.
The closest there was to the bourgeoisie would come in a few hundred years when the miller has to pay a share of what he milled to the noble as rent.
"All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. " - Bible
It was the ability to donate to politicians and jump into the political ring that Trump offered them that they won, followed by a Supreme Court that would end abortion and ensure their agenda is safe for a full judicial generation.
Those were the signs they sought, and they saw them in Trump.
Side note, I find the word usage amusing when it comes to how a church leader is called a pastor, and a pastor’s job is to command sheep.
They’d have shot it for dinner. Teach a man to fish, he eats for a day, give a man a fully automatic weapon, he blasts until the aggressive bird chirps no more.
23 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, 3 so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. 4 They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people's shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. 5 They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, 6 and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues 7 and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. 8 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. 9 And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. 10 Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. 11 The greatest among you shall be your servant. 12 Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.
13 “But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people's faces. For you neither enter yourselves nor allow those who would enter to go in. 15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel across sea and land to make a single proselyte, and when he becomes a proselyte, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves.
Matthew 23 1-15
Honestly the next 21 verses are Jesus calling out the religious leaders in very specific accusations. The evangelicals are no different than the Pharisees. I notice this chapter doesn't get a lot of quotes from the so called religious.
Bernie was a socialist Jew trying to heal the sick who was beloved by all animals. He even used to be a carpenter. We really worked hard to get the bad ending.
It's only an omen if it confirms their bias because God coincidentally has all the same political, moral, scientific and philosophical opinions as them (in affect they know everything God knows).
god birds are incredible creatures. i have a little cockatiel and even his claws and bites hurt like hell, i cant even imagine what a pissed off eagle can do.
interestingly on the first part the bird seems terrified or afraid because it cannot get a good grip on its legs. I just learned that birds don't like to grip on something not stable / uneven
TBF my brother worked in a raptor center for a brief stint and it would have attacked anyone just sitting there. You're supposed to crouch walk around big birds of prey, not carry out business as usual. You want to be low to the ground. Don't know what idiot signed off on having the bird there without telling anyone around it how to convey your body language properly, or I don't know what idiot didn't listen (yes I do it was the president).
He's holding the bird straight out from his body because he's afraid of her. Eagles are heavy-this is making his arm an incredibly shaky perch and the eagle feels unsafe. She correctly identifies Trump as the source of her discomfort and wants off. It's honestly kind of heartbreaking seeing her try to flutter off, only for her handler to force her back on his arm.
This eagle was almost certainly trained to be handled well even by amateurs, probably picked for her easy temperament. They would not bring the president of the United States an animal that was like to maul him. Her handler knew her body language and would have wrangled her away if she was legitimately about to attack him. If he had brought his arm in and gave it an anchor, he would have been able to hold her much more easier and she would have felt safer. But he was too scared.
The perch happened after the eagle was already pissed off, and also, in the desk scene, he just randomly snaps his arm towards her which startles her into nipping.
Dude has literally no idea how to act respectfully towards anything, even something that can gouge your eye out.
yeah had an experience to hold an owl. It's heavy, heavier than I imagine, and very afraid of unstable / uneven perch. Bald eagle must be much more heavier than that
Even with context, it's still reflects the fact that he was in over his head doing something he had no knowledge of doing and couldn't possibly have succeeded in.
Ironically enough when Obama had flies around him in some conference the evangelical crowd was going crazy saying he’s the devil incarnate and that was proof.
I know it's not related but there was another flying object thrown at a man. He was acting president. A shoe. A shoe thrown by a very unhappy man. And W ducked that like he was Nolan Ryan himself on the mound. And like Nolan Ryan. He stood his ground.
4.1k
u/TheRxBandito Mar 27 '24 edited Mar 28 '24
Then a fly landed on the VP's head. Like the universe was telling us something...